- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 21:38:11 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11956 --- Comment #8 from steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> 2011-03-04 21:38:10 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > (In reply to comment #3) > > > > (In reply to comment #2) > > > > > > > What is the use case for allowing presentation on all elements? > > > > > > Some answers to that question can be found inside the request to 'Allow > > > role="presentation" to override the default role of any element', which was > > > filed as bug 10919 by Martin Kliehm, > > > hi leif, i am aware of bug 10919 it does not provide use cases for using > > presentation on form controls or links. > > There you mention two very specific elements. May be it can be justified that > those elements are excempted from the general permission to use > role=presention. In contrast, this bug report covers "all" elements. > > Btw, role=presentation is not the only thing that could make form controls and > links inaccessible to AT. Placing form controls or links inside elements with > role="img" would do the same. (Example: <div role=img ><a > href="*">link</a></div>) > > > so it doesn't provide any use cases to > > cover these, the rationale of the editor was; > > > > "It seems that the ARIA spec is very confused on this > > issue, but in the interests of expediency, and under the assumption that the > > ARIA spec will be corrected to match implementations, I've changed the spec to > > allow role=presentation everywhere." > > > > I don't believe 'expediency' to be an acceptable rationale. > > He also provided a link to a longer resonnement as part of the rationale. And I > don't know if it is fruitful to think that his decision did not have anything > to do with Martin's bugs and comments. > > (THough, it seems relevant to point out that the examples they discussed were > not links or form controls with the presentation role.) > > > as to your statement: > > > > "then it seems that you EITHER need to re-open 10919 needs to be > > reopened. OR ELSE, file bugs about each element for which it should not be > > permitted." > > > > whose rules are these? > > The important thing is to do what solves the problem - not "whose rules" it is. i don't think the course of action you outline solves the problem for me, but if it does for you then go right ahead. I will wait to hear back from ian on his use case for allowing presentation on all elements. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 4 March 2011 21:38:12 UTC